Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Literacy Reading topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears informational presentation on Read Act changes, proponents press for ‘science of reading’ clarity
Summary
Representative Mary Mueller presented House File 877 for informational discussion March 6, describing a bill that emphasizes the "science of reading," tighter rubrics for curriculum selection, and teacher competency demonstrations tied to Read Act implementation.
Representative Mary Mueller presented House File 877 as an informational item to the House Education Finance Committee on March 6. The bill centers on the Read Act and would emphasize adoption of instruction, interventions and curriculum grounded in the “science of reading,” while adding accountability measures and rubric transparency for curriculum selection.
Why it matters: HF 877 would clarify statutory expectations for K–3 literacy instruction and make changes to oversight and implementation that supporters say are intended to raise reading proficiency statewide. Opponents and some stakeholders warned committee members that language changes could be interpreted to exclude culturally responsive practices if not carefully defined.
Major provisions described at the hearing include specifying that instruction, interventions, professional development and curriculum align with the science of reading; directing clearer, published rubrics for curriculum review; and shifting some implementation duties referenced in the current statute to the Minnesota Department of Education (MDE). The bill’s draft also includes language authorizing practical assessments or demonstrated competency for teachers working at higher tiers of intervention.
Representative Mueller said the working engrossment incorporates policy committee amendments and expands the statutory definition of the science of reading to include explicit, systematic instruction of phonological/phonemic awareness, phonics and decoding. She told members the bill also allows nationally accredited professional-development providers to qualify for state-approved training pathways.
Supporters at the hearing argued that clearer standards and assessments would help address persistent low literacy outcomes in targeted student groups. Representative Mueller cited other states’ literacy initiatives and said some jurisdictions require demonstrations of teacher knowledge or short exams for reading endorsements; she said the proposed approach could include practical demonstrations rather than only written examinations.
Opponents and some committee members raised concerns about how the bill would treat culturally responsive instruction and whether moving duties to MDE would strain department capacity. Representative Perez Vega and others urged that culturally responsive practices and dual-immersion programs be preserved as part of a comprehensive approach to literacy for English learners and multilingual students. Representative Mueller said she would continue working with members across the aisle and with stakeholders on definitions and implementation details.
Administration officials signaled implementation questions. Ado Ooni of MDE noted earlier in the hearing that the department is already managing large responsibilities tied to recent legislative changes and that shifting further duties would have staffing and oversight implications.
No committee action was taken; the presentation was informational. Representative Mueller and several members said they would continue stakeholder conversations and draft language refinement before any bill markup.
